ArticleScientific reports2026
A mixed-methods national study assessing municipal rodent control infrastructure, surveillance capacity and disaster readiness in the United States.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to characterize municipal rodent control infrastructure, service visibility, planning capacity and workforce readiness across the United States. A mixed-methods cross-sectional design was used, combining an environmental scan of 147 municipal documents with a 31-item online survey administered to pest and environmental health professionals between August 2021 and November 2022. The environmental scan assessed program robustness using a weighted scoring rubric and survey items captured information on service availability, departmental oversight, planning infrastructure and training frequency. Descriptive statistics summarized municipal capacity indicators. A total of 727 U.S.-based professionals completed the survey. Fewer than half (44.5%) reported that their municipality offered rodent control services, and only 45.8% of those familiar with programs knew specific service details. Oversight was distributed across health departments, contracted services, standalone rodent units and public works agencies. Only 36.9% reported the presence of a rodent-borne disease action plan and most respondents indicated that funding for rodent control was not prioritized. Environmental scan scores ranged from 0 to 11, with higher-scoring municipalities demonstrating clearer oversight, active surveillance and integration into preparedness frameworks. Findings indicate substantial variation in municipal rodent control infrastructure, limited program visibility and inconsistent planning and training capacity. These results highlight gaps that may affect municipal disaster readiness and suggest opportunities to strengthen oversight clarity, surveillance systems and workforce development to support more consistent rodent management across jurisdictions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.